Slashdot Mirror


Researchers Demonstrate Quantum Levitation

UnknownSoldier writes "Wired reports that researchers at Tel Aviv University have discovered you can 'lock' a magnetic field into place with a superconductor. They have a very cool demonstration of a frozen puck and some of the neat things you can do with it while its orientation remains locked but its location is movable. Might we someday see high speed trains that will be 'impossible' to tip over, or a new generation of batteries with this technology?"

133 comments

  1. Hoverboard by The+Joe+Kewl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Awesome!
    WHEN Can I order my Hoverboard?!?!?!

    1. Re:Hoverboard by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 3, Funny

      Looks like a case of cold feet.

    2. Re:Hoverboard by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, though it seems like this thing is a little too easy to "unlock". How would you build a train when a small nudge can make it change alignment?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    3. Re:Hoverboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah never could put something like wheels with sensors in them to stabilize it.

    4. Re:Hoverboard by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Agreed, though it seems like this thing is a little too easy to "unlock". How would you build a train when a small nudge can make it change alignment?

      It's not clear how much force he was using to change the orientation of the puck, but since the puck can support itself while upside down, its appears to exert at least as much force as it takes to support the weight of the puck. So a 100 ton train may require 100 tons of force to lift it from the track.

      From the demo, it's hard to see if it would have enough force to keep the train on the track, or if the pucks would have to surround the track to keep the train centered -- like conventional maglev trains. (or wheels as a backup if its a rare case when the train does stray from center)

    5. Re:Hoverboard by Riceballsan · · Score: 2

      Well flicking your finger will deal enough force to unlock anything in that scale from that demonstration, By the same logic real trains are subject do danger of a medium sized bird lifting them off of the tracks. The question isn't how easy is it to change the alignment on a air hockey puck sized object. The question is how it will scale when you are working with a multi ton train.

    6. Re:Hoverboard by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Along those lines, how many tons of superconductor does it take to support a many ton train.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    7. Re:Hoverboard by jhoegl · · Score: 1

      Although the logistical problems ran through my mind on how one can implement this real world, it is still freakin cool!

    8. Re:Hoverboard by Yvan256 · · Score: 2

      42.

    9. Re:Hoverboard by ColdWetDog · · Score: 0

      Although the logistical problems ran through my mind on how one can implement this real world, it is still freakin cool!

      Yeah, real cool. Liquid Nitrogen cool.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    10. Re:Hoverboard by otaku244 · · Score: 1

      not till 2015
      Wait... that was the shoes

      --
      Mod me down, I shall become more off-topic than you could possibly imagine.
    11. Re:Hoverboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cold feet? For levitation, that's a small price to pay!

      Now to get a solid body made out of yttrium barium copper oxide..

    12. Re:Hoverboard by Khyber · · Score: 1

      This is a MAGNETIC means of transport.

      You wouldn't have wheels.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    13. Re:Hoverboard by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

      You can have your hoverboard right after they start making pavements out of rare earth magnets.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    14. Re:Hoverboard by mikael · · Score: 1

      We did have MagLev trains - not super-conductors, but just ordinary copper coils.

      Some airports (like Birmingham, UK) did have them but stopped using them due to to the rising cost of electricity and maintenance.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    15. Re:Hoverboard by user+flynn · · Score: 1

      Now that was funny. :D

      --
      In the distance you hear an ominous moo.
  2. I don't think this is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    This isn't new is it? It's a very cool demonstration, but unless I'm mistaken they didn't discover this--the actual article doesn't say it was a new discovery and I'm fairly sure my physics teacher showed me this a year or two ago. It is really cool, and the physics behind how it works is very interesting. It's pretty accessible too, don't be discouraged from reading up on it because you think it will be too hard to understand.

    1. Re:I don't think this is new? by Carnildo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Looks to me like a demonstration of the Meissner effect, something that was discovered in 1933.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    2. Re:I don't think this is new? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Not exactly new, but it is an application of the physics behind the Meissner effect. Something that aside from floating a cube above a dish of liquid nitrogen I've not really heard of anyone bothering with, or at least demonstrating in such a jaw dropping manner.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:I don't think this is new? by Frenzied+Apathy · · Score: 1

      Read the comments in the linked Wired article. You're right. Not technology/discovery, but just a new application of existing knowledge.

      --
      The cake is a lie.
    4. Re:I don't think this is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Meissner effect lock things to the magnetic field or does it merely make them float in the air?

    5. Re:I don't think this is new? by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Yeah, we made these in physical chemistry lab 7 years ago. Not really a big deal.

    6. Re:I don't think this is new? by xTantrum · · Score: 1
      It isn't. Old Tech with a new name and twist. This all has to do not necessarily with the quantum properties, but more to do with matter being super cooled . For some reason matter behaves differently as it approaches absolute zero. This is similiar to the Bose-Einstein condensate and the Meissner effect as linked above.

      although it is practical in the lab and in theory, there are still problems that occur when scaling it up. Like how to keep the track cooled for example. Its still a ways off.

      --
      $action = empty(PHP) ? backToC() : unset(PHP) ; "when the concrete cases are understood, the abstractions are readily
    7. Re:I don't think this is new? by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1

      So WHY has nobody yet made a room with a cooled superconducting floor and went in wearing magnetic boots? WHY?

      --

      Liberty.

    8. Re:I don't think this is new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The Meissner effect is just the expulsion of magnetic fields when gaining diamagnetic properties during transition to superconducting state, IIRC. That just makes the superconductor repel magnets. The "quantum locking" effect the guy is talking about -- what keeps the puck suspended and prevents it from flying away from the magnet -- has a different name, flux pinning and only occurs in Type II superconductors.

      No, this isn't new at all. Though perhaps the compound they are using may be... unless they just set up the demo for generic educational purposes.

    9. Re:I don't think this is new? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Well, unless I'm mistaken, *YOU* need to be wearing the cooled superconductor, for one.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    10. Re:I don't think this is new? by flosofl · · Score: 1

      It's not the Meissner effect. That is for Type I superconductors. This is Flux Pinning and is a different effect for Type II superconductors. You can't change orientation and "lock" it (the Pinning part of the phenomenon) with the Meissner effect. There are some very informative links above regarding this.

      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    11. Re:I don't think this is new? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      As I understand it it is a specialization of the Meissner effect wherein by introduction of defects magnetic fields may penetrate the superconductor but only at these defect points. These magnetic fields able to penetrate act as control rods of a sort which provides the "stiffness." BTW: you wouldn't happen to mind providing said links would you?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  3. Midnight train tipping. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    When has train tipping been a major problem? All those pesky teenagers I tell you - bored and at it again!

    1. Re:Midnight train tipping. by vlm · · Score: 1

      When has train tipping been a major problem?

      Well, all the time. Clay/sandy soil and washouts due to spring thaws, extremely severe thunderstorms where you get 3 inches of rain per hour, hurricanes... Even just plain old poor maintenance.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    2. Re:Midnight train tipping. by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 1

      So how is flux pinning going to stop the train from tipping over if the base that holds the magnets tips over due to the soil supporting it becoming unstable?

    3. Re:Midnight train tipping. by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      With the older demos, the train would tip over if the track tipped. In fact, it stayed in exactly the same orientation to the track no matter what, so if you flipped the track upside-down the train would be hovering upside-down too. That's not exactly ideal.

      This demo, OTOH, showed that they could set any orientation they wanted between the puck and the track it rode on, and change it at will. Maybe your track has slanted sideways and you don't want the train tilting at that angle?

      Now if they can come up with a better way to change its angle that doesn't involve "stop the train, get out, and push"... ideally, you'd want the train to stay upright, even if the track under it tilted, and do so automatically as soon as it detected a change in angle.

    4. Re:Midnight train tipping. by Lithdren · · Score: 2

      Clearly you support the magnets with magnets below. Then when the soil gives out it'll float in place. For extra security, secure the second layer with a third layer of magnets.

      Turtles, turtles all way down!

    5. Re:Midnight train tipping. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Midnight train tipping. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A powerful gyro, perhaps?

    7. Re:Midnight train tipping. by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      That's not a bad idea, actually, but you're basically talking about a flywheel, of the sort they'd use to keep a hospital on-line through a power outage*. And damn, we're talking a lot of kinetic energy stored in those things... they're usually buried underground because you really don't want one of them getting lose. But maybe that's mostly just hype. Supposedly they're supposed to turn into the biggest ever hairball if they come lose, to waste all that energy really fast and preventing them doing severe damage to much other than themselves. Still - I don't think you'd want one of them on a train.

      *dunno what the energy requirements would be, really, but I still figure it's got to be large to keep a fairly massive train upright if the track's not level.

    8. Re:Midnight train tipping. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the puck keeps its orientation relative to the track, you don't need to stop it to tilt. You just need some auxiliary reaction engines on the sides, such as those used in space to change course.

    9. Re:Midnight train tipping. by robot_love · · Score: 1

      As I read the first line of your comment, I thought to myself, "I'm going to post a reply saying, 'But it's turtles all the way down.'".

      Then I read the second line of your post and saw that the reason I thought of turtles is because that's exactly where you were going.

      In any case, I laughed.

      --
      .there is enough of everything for everyone.
  4. SUPERCONDUCTOR by gygy · · Score: 5, Informative

    SUPERCONDUCTOR not semiconductor !

    1. Re:SUPERCONDUCTOR by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a semiconductor is what you get when Gustav Mahler sleeps on the train tracks.

  5. SWEET! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Where can I buy this desk toy set?

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  6. after you sign the 200 page disclaimer forum by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    saying that you can not sue if you get hurt.

  7. Old news (like 1980 old) by genjix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This has been around since the time of Carl Sagan. For a much better explanation of what is happening (and the science behind it), see this video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeS_U9qFg7Y&feature=player_embedded

    They haven't invented anything new so don't get excited about wipeout ships and hoverboards just yet. The problem is the immense amount of energy to keep the superconductor cooled.

    1. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 2

      Did they have superconductors that worked at liquid nitrogen temperatures in 1980? The amount of energy needed to keep nitrogen liquid is significantly less than what it takes to keep helium liquid.

    2. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the levitation is not what's new, but it's the locking of the position of the levitating object that is new.

    3. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for that post .. Its a great demo.

    4. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

      I think the difference between the new video and the one you posted is that in the new video, the superconductor can be placed in any position and it will stay in that orientation, and can have its orientation changed manually at any time. Your video, I think they imply that the positioning is locked in during the cooling process, and cannot be changed until it warms and is cooled again. So, this aspect of the material seems new.

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    5. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by a.stranger · · Score: 1

      High temperature superconductors were discovered in 1986. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_superconductivity

    6. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by pz · · Score: 2

      Um, it's pretty easy to check. Wikipedia shows the first high Tc discovery was in 1986. I remember it well, as I was dating a physicist at the time.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    7. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I remember it well, as I was dating a physicist at the time.

      please become a meme, please become a meme...

    8. Re:Old news (like 1980 old) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talking about hoverboard, has anyone posted the following video on /. before?
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F-VVmMD4_k

  8. How do you make the mistake by poity · · Score: 2

    of calling a superconductor a semiconductor?
    WIRED, where do you get your reporters?
    And /., where are you editors?

    --
    your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    1. Re:How do you make the mistake by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      That's was my fault, not Wired's, for mixing up superconductor and semiconductor. That's what you get when you rush a submission when you first wake up :/

      Sorry.

    2. Re:How do you make the mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too busy levitating, too high above the computers.
      They can barely read the screens, so just tap Enter with their big toes.

      Damn it Slashdot staff, stop getting distracted and making all kinds of discoveries with science.

  9. Totally wrong by henryteighth · · Score: 1

    Firstly it's a superconductor, not a semiconductor (as would have been obvious had the editor even bothered to glance at TFA). They're totally different things. Also, this is not news at all: it's a cool video, but again as TFA states it's just an example of the well-known Meissner effect.

  10. Call it what it is! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We already have a term for this technology: tractor beam.

  11. So? by Dr+Bip · · Score: 1

    The simple error in the original post is trivial - it's a superconductor. And it demonstrates flux pinning. But this has been demonstrated ever since superconductors have been made with non-superconducting regions in them (ie, not elemental superconductors like Pb and Al). This is *not* news. Unless it is the mid 1980s and I've not noticed.

    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are the examples of orientation locking in previous demonstrations?

  12. dumbing down of slashdot by doug141 · · Score: 0

    Seriously. Meissner effect is old news, too. I mentioned to a friend how slashdot seemed to have gotten really dumbed down in the last year, and he made an interesting connection: ipads became popular.

    1. Re:dumbing down of slashdot by Coren22 · · Score: 0

      Is Slashdot.org a default bookmark on iPads? That would make the dumbing down make much more sense.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    2. Re:dumbing down of slashdot by Tinctorius · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is flux pinning, and apparently, is a different phenomenon than the Meissner effect.

    3. Re:dumbing down of slashdot by robotkid · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is flux pinning, and apparently, is a different phenomenon than the Meissner effect.

      Yes, but this was already well known in the late 1980's when type II superconductors hit center stage in the solid-state physics world. And 30 seconds later every single person in the field thought "hey, we could SOOO build a sweet maglev train with this". But it's still not practical by any stretch of the imagination except as a neat toy.

      So /. is only 20+ years late instead of ~80 years with the Meissner effect.

  13. It's very rare... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    that I can say someone showed me something that makes my jaw drop. But this most certainly did. Wow, this absolutely floored me. Good work guys.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    1. Re:It's very rare... by tantaliz3 · · Score: 1

      I agree! Daamn that's cool!

    2. Re:It's very rare... by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

      Well until we can come out with superconductors that can operate at room temperature, don't expect to see this applied anywhere else aside from the lab.
      As others have pointed out, this is not new and has been around for over 20 years, the fact that it requires extremely cold temperatures has relegated it to a mere novelty as far as practical applications go.

    3. Re:It's very rare... by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

      Hmmm...you realize that what may be a rare event to you is ho-hum reality for the rest of us, right? Demonstrations of the Meissner Effect (or more specifically, flux pinning) stopped making jaws drop during the Reagan administration, dude. This is circus science -- all spectacle, no substance.

  14. /. Haters Gonna Hate by cosm · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    All technical typos and misleading whatever aside, and aside from all the hawking about how this has already existed or this is not new blah blah blah....THIS SHIT IS STILL FUCKING AMAZING. GET OVER YOURSELVES.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    1. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is not that this isn't amazing, it's that the Slashdot editors (and Wired) are presenting an 80-year-old discovery as something new -- and then describing it using the wrong terminology.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    2. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by Frenzied+Apathy · · Score: 1

      All technical typos and misleading whatever aside, and aside from all the hawking about how this has already existed or this is not new blah blah blah....THIS SHIT IS STILL FUCKING AMAZING. GET OVER YOURSELVES.

      YEAH! What he said!!!

      --
      The cake is a lie.
    3. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by cosm · · Score: 1

      Very true, perhaps it's time for me to start weening off /., it gets tiring seeing so many cynical comments about the editing and misuse of terminology, and naturally those are not the fault of the commenters. Albeit /. does beat most all other news sites and the likes of Youtube in regards to the level of intelligence in its comment sections.

      I guess I just can't tell if the rising cynicism here matches the degrading quality of editing.

      --
      'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    4. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by radtea · · Score: 3, Informative

      I guess I just can't tell if the rising cynicism here matches the degrading quality of editing.

      They go hand in hand, in part because of the number of ignorant people responding to this story saying "WOW THAT IS SO AMAZING!", which just announces that they have somehow managed to preserve their ignorance of this effect for long enough to be old enough to post on /. but are still posting on /. It makes those of us who have an actual interest in science and technology feel like this isn't really the place we should be.

      As well as presenting an 80-year-old effect that has been a stock benchtop demonstration for 20 years as something "new" and "exciting", the marketers (not scientists or engineers) behind this have added the word "quantum" to it, which is so obviously catering to the ignorant it is just sad. I've even seen this described as using "quantum superconductors", which nicely distinguishes them from all the classical superconductors out there...

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    5. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by shadowofwind · · Score: 1

      So where can a person go for real information and/or actual thinking on any topic? Even the best posters on /. appear to me to be mostly posturing, with nobody actually learning anything from the discussion.

    6. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by silentbrad · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just me, but I think you read the summary wrong. Sure, levitation, quantum levitation, whatever. If it gets someone with a passing interest in science to check it out and say, "Hey, that's cool!", isn't that a good thing? The point is, it doesn't say that it's brand new. Maybe they could have mentioned that it builds upon 80 year old observations, but the part that is new is that they've discovered either how to, or that they can, lock the orientation of the superconductor.

    7. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by Sabriel · · Score: 1

      So, eighty years ago, we knew about using imperfections in superconductors to pin them within a magnetic field as opposed to simply floating them above it?

    8. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, eighty years ago, we knew about using imperfections in superconductors to pin them within a magnetic field as opposed to simply floating them above it?

      Flux pinning was discovered in 1933 by Walther Meissner himself (Thus the name Meissner effect), which was 78 years ago. Superconductivity itself was discovered before that in 1911, so exactly 100 years ago.

      So to answer your question, in two years from now the answer will be "yes", and at the moment it is "no but close enough"

      http://www.futurescience.com/scintro.html

    9. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by radtea · · Score: 1

      So where can a person go for real information and/or actual thinking on any topic?

      I've been casting around for a while on this question and nothing jumps out. arstechnica is kind of ok, but often gets facts completely wrong and their editorial "explanations" frequently read as if they are written by someone who either lacks understanding of the subject or the audience--they often confuse me, and I'm a physicist with eclectic research experience. Bad Astronomy is also OK.

      The basic problem, I think, is that the number of technically knowledgeable people on the Web stays roughly constant (the number of STEM grads in the US has been flat for 25 years, for example) but the total number of people is still increasing.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    10. Re:/. Haters Gonna Hate by shadowofwind · · Score: 1

      The basic problem, I think, is that the number of technically knowledgeable people on the Web stays roughly constant (the number of STEM grads in the US has been flat for 25 years, for example) but the total number of people is still increasing.

      I think its probably worse than constant for English language sites, because a large percentage of those people prefer Chinese sites and/or do not have interests outside their own research area.

  15. Why?! by M0j0_j0j0 · · Score: 1

    Why the "quantum"???? can anybody explain?

    1. Re:Why?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It sounds cooler that way.
      It really has nothing to do with quantum mechanics, it's the effects of a magnetic field on a superconductor.

    2. Re:Why?! by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Using "quantum" in the description makes it sound like a cool new discovery, rather than simply a demonstration of magnetic levitation using the Meissner effect and flux pinning.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    3. Re:Why?! by pclminion · · Score: 1

      Using "quantum" in the description makes it sound like a cool new discovery

      I don't get this about people. Quantum mechanics was worked out at around the same time we were figuring out airplanes. I don't see people stopping dead in their tracks and staring slack-jawed into the sky whenever a jet flies overhead. But you can always baffle people by throwing a "quantum" in there.

      Quantum means "comes in little chunks." OH MY GOD, THE WORLD COMES IN LITTLE CHUNKS?! THAT'S UTTERLY UNBELIEVABLE."

      You guys need a brain update.

    4. Re:Why?! by Fauxbo · · Score: 1

      Much like Jets, Quantum Mechanics are very interesting when up close and personal.

      Seeing a Jet fly by 100 feet above your head will make me star slack-jawed into the sky, and think man that is big and flying... weird.

      I do have a full understanding of the science behind flight and some of the science behind Quantum Mechanics (saying a full understanding would be lying, it's still freaky to think about)

      Seeing this up close and personal is neat, that's all.

    5. Re:Why?! by amRadioHed · · Score: 2

      "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." - Richard Feynman

      There lies the difference. No reputable scientist would have said that about aircraft anytime in the last 75 years.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  16. TFA is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just the same old demo of a levitating superconductor. By calling it "quantum levitation" instead of the more familiar "Meisner effect", you made me click. Well done, sirs. Well done. Except of course, that I'm using various ad-blocking techniques...

    1. Re:TFA is nothing new by Jeng · · Score: 1

      You do know that if you actually create an account you can have ads disabled.

      I mean yea, I'm using an ad-blocker, but /. already doesn't serve ads to me.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:TFA is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a free account, but didn't consider that post worthy of potentially burning karma. Slashdot has offered me ad blocking, perhaps due to the age of my account and/or the karma status. It's a moot point, since the ad-blocking on my local box is enough to kill whatever it is they're serving.

    3. Re:TFA is nothing new by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      Same here. I normally unblock ads on sites I like, but on /. they tend to more annoying than on most of my favorite sites, and they are often rather heavy as well. So I use the free ad removal, and I block, in case my karma falls too low for ad removal. Sometimes when I can afford it, I subscribe for a while as well.

    4. Re:TFA is nothing new by Jeng · · Score: 1

      but didn't consider that post worthy of potentially burning karma.

      This has always puzzled me, why care what your karma status is? If your karma gets dinged, big freaking whooptydoo.

      I tend to only go AC if I'm posting a question so stupid that I don't want it associated with me.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    5. Re:TFA is nothing new by frith01 · · Score: 1

      You missed the part in the video where they turn the track upside down. If they were only using the meisner effect, the puck would drop to the ground. They have found a way to control the magnetic field more precisely, and pin the object in place. ( ie, a useful example of the engineering techniques now possible with the effect, instead of just ooh, shiny. )

  17. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would take more force to dislodge these trains than those held on rails by gravity. See for yourself.

  18. Better video. by Ecuador · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try this longer video instead. It has construction details, explanations, double levitation etc.

    Also, "semiconductor"? Jeez, that is a lame mistake even by Slashdot standards!

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  19. not news... by or_is_it · · Score: 1

    this has been demonstrated before. now, would the entire track with puck locked in flux in a track weigh the same as the sum of the entire track + the puck not locked in flux in a track? if no, THAT would be news.

  20. Engineering 101 by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    Might someday we see high speed trains that will be 'impossible' to tip over

    Yeah, because tipping over is the major concern with high speed trains. Who writes this stuff?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Engineering 101 by SyntheticTruth · · Score: 1

      Not CmdrTaco. Just sayin'.

    2. Re:Engineering 101 by ArundelCastle · · Score: 1

      Might someday we see high speed trains that will be 'impossible' to tip over

      Yeah, because tipping over is the major concern with high speed trains. Who writes this stuff?

      Any train using a metal rail system regardless of speed, can derail and tip, because once derailed there is no force to elevate the carriage itself. It's not especially hard to damage a track to that point either. And think of earthquake zones where a majority of high speed trains are used. Think of losing speed while on a banked incline. Meanwhile parking a magnet powerful enough to fatally shove a 200 ton locomotive off a bridge would probably be noticed driving around...

      I suspect it is far more viable and useful in other shipping and logistics uses. Warehouses and airports could replace conveyor belts. No moving parts, reduced risk of spilling or wrong-side-up tipping. And don't forget the short order cooking industry. All those notes and plates sliding around, with a side of quant-ham. 8-)

  21. Cooooool by Botia · · Score: 1

    I love living in the future.

  22. Stupid Slashdot link processing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  23. No trains or batteries, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Might someday we see high speed trains that will be 'impossible' to tip over or a new generation of batteries with this technology?"

    No, but it will make for some spectacular hockey matches.

  24. So 2007, See cute Model Train video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That whole train idea is so 2007:

    YouTube.com IFW-Dresden Superconductor Maglev Train Model

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeS_U9qFg7Y

    Very poor reporting, misleading video.

  25. Greetings From Two Days Ago by Nova+Express · · Score: 1

    When this video first made the rounds on Fark and elsewhere.

    By the way, here's a longer video with more explanation of how it works.

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

  26. Re:jewed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, and a couple of weeks ago an Israeli won a Nobel prize. Big deal.

  27. Tractor Beam by NotPeteMcCabe · · Score: 1

    This is the first bit of science I've seen that could plausibly be turned into one of the staples of SciFi, the tractor beam. How long before they have one that can move the (levitating) puck at a distance?

  28. What exactly did they discover? by Hentes · · Score: 1

    Superconductors have been there for ages. I remember being shown levitation like this in high school. The article doesn't seem to mention the actual discovery.

  29. And why would it make sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try for an enlightened answer.

  30. sad by shadowofwind · · Score: 1

    We did essentially this in my high school physics class in 1987.

    1. Re:sad by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      Excatly! Even the superconductor itself is YBCuO, which has been well known since 1986. It's the first "Type 2" superconductor to have been discovered. Back then things were going so fast that many people thought a room-temperature superconductor was going to be discovered within a reasonable amount of time. So it is indeed sad that 25 years later, we've basically made no real progress.

    2. Re:sad by mjackson14609 · · Score: 1

      Excatly! Even the superconductor itself is YBCuO, which has been well known since 1986. It's the first "Type 2" superconductor to have been discovered.

      It may be the first high-temperature superconductor discovered. Type II superconductors go back to the 1930s. (I worked with Nb3Sn samples when I had a summer job at Gulf General Atomic in 1969.)

      --
      I decided that behaving ethically was the most nihilistic thing I could do. - Paul Pavel
  31. Frictionless rotation by Commontwist · · Score: 1

    Nice piece of non-physically driven motion (after initial nudge). No physical wear if the pieces don't touch each other.

    If that puck were in a complete vacuum in a supercooled chamber I wonder how long that puck would rotate?

    1. Re:Frictionless rotation by The+Askylist · · Score: 1

      I was thinking this might make a pretty cool magnetic bearing, if the cooling could be sorted - flywheel energy storage springs to mind.

  32. Did anyone even read the article? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    There are a ton of posts going on about how it's just the "Meissner effect", the researchers aren't claiming that is something new, they are claiming they have built the first track that uses the Meissner effect for levitation and can lock the magnetic field to angle the object.

    "Researchers at the school of physics and astronomy at Tel Aviv University have created a track around which a superconductor can float, thanks to the phenomenon of “quantum levitation“.

    This levitation effect is explained by the Meissner effect, which describes how, when a material makes the transition from its normal to its superconducting state, it actively excludes magnetic fields from its interior, leaving only a thin layer on its surface."

    1. Re:Did anyone even read the article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So all the tons of postings about just the meissner effect are correct? Thanks. I thought they were too.

  33. WipeOut! by Taty'sEyes · · Score: 1

    One step closer to being able to play WipeOut! for reals... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHlHitIc7pY

    --
    We show geeks how to get their dream girl at EyesOfOdessa.com
    1. Re:WipeOut! by ProzacPatient · · Score: 1

      or perhaps something even worse

  34. Not the Meissner effect by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is not the Meissner effect! If it were you wouldn't be able to do the stunt where they move the disk to a different angle and it stays there. This is more subtle. The Meissner effect involves superconductors not letting magnetic field lines pass through the superconductor. This involves special superconductors that allow magnetic field lines to pass through but make the field lines get trapped in imperfections in the superconductor. The name of this effect is "flux pinning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flux_pinning. Here is the website of the group who made this video where they explain it http://www.quantumlevitation.com/levitation/Quantum_Levitation.html

    1. Re:Not the Meissner effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The name of this effect is "flux pinning" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flux_pinning

      It's pinning for the fjords!

    2. Re:Not the Meissner effect by Hythlodaeus · · Score: 1

      It's an application of the Meissner effect, just ensuring the superconductor is thin enough that penetrable locations exist.

      --
      For great justice.
    3. Re:Not the Meissner effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I got the impression from those links that the new piece of this is that the superconductor is only 1 micron thick, which allows the magnetic field to penetrate it in "quantum tubes," which makes the orientation locking possible. The link to the train below (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeS_U9qFg7Y&feature=player_embedded) shows the train shaking as it takes corners. Can anyone else claiming that this is old technology confirm that the superconductors in the other experiments they have used were much thicker than 1 micron? Did they really demonstrate this kind of "locking" behavior?

  35. Aww..... late news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't they demo this in Kitchen science section of naked scientist, few months ago.

  36. pretty basic nowadays by Skylax · · Score: 5, Informative

    every physics student gets a demonstration of this effect in his solid state physics lecture. But usually the superconductor is rather small and is put into a small matchbox type car to drive it around a track. Here they used a relatively large and bulky superconducting disk, so the orientation locking is more visible. Although not new, it never gets old and I'm always fascinated by it. Just don't use the word "discovery" here!

    1. Re:pretty basic nowadays by Deadstick · · Score: 1

      Hey, there's another thread today that claims non-Newtonian fluids have just been discovered...

      rj

    2. Re:pretty basic nowadays by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe it was a discovery for that researcher the same way America was a discovery for European people. Congratulation you discovered something many people already knew about.

  37. Old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, so I saw this video on youtube a few days ago and noticed it on Wired yesterday. Now it's on Slashdot today. Is this what Slashdot has become? I used to come here to find out about new things I couldn't get elsewhere. Now, it seems that even science and computer related stories on Slashdot are old reposts from other social media sites. I have been reading Slashdot on an almost daily basis for a decade now and have to say that this walled garden of Slashdot isn't working anymore. Either up the standards, or open posting to more people. You can't continue to think that the appeal of mother Russia and Step 4 - Profit jokes are enough to keep people coming back to reread the shit they read on other sites yesterday or the day before.

  38. I'm Actually More Impressed by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    That he's handling that superchilled hockeypuck so easily. You'd think a superconductor would suck all the heat out of your fingertips while at the same time becoming too hot to remain a superconductor.

    I've known about that effect for ages but I haven't ever seen a live video of it, so I still find it to be reasonably nifty. I'll be much more impressed when you can do it with a room temperature hockey puck, though.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  39. Re:jewed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm with you pal.
    So did some guy named Obama.

  40. It is astonishing to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there are people who haven't seen this. This has been around a VERY long time. In fact, I'm pretty sure the idea of the "hoverboard" from Back to the Future II was based on the concept that we would find room-temperature superconductors. I remember thinking this at the time the movie came out, and I was only 12 or so at the time, so it is absolutely astonishing to me that there are people even today, in 2011, that don't know about this. Get with the program people. This is old old OLD news.

  41. meh by strack · · Score: 1

    now a room temprature superconductor. *that* would be news.

  42. This is old news, from like 30 years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is how all type-2 superconductors behave. Raise the bar slashdot you're falling behind.

  43. Blast from the past by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

    This effect is well known and has been since somebody named Meissner wrote a paper about it in 1933. In 1986, I attended a public lecture at Caltech by Richard Feynman on the "Meissner Effect," which was accompanied by a video starring (surprise) a frozen hockey puck. It was mildly interesting at the time, but that was a quarter century ago -- to see the same effect treated like it is something strange and new is just sad. Science should be about discovery, not showmanship. Looking at you Sagan, Feynman, Tyson...

  44. That's not the same thing by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

    Look at 0:53 and 1:50 in the video you posted -- this train is locked in position in *one orientation* at *one distance* from the track, and it happens when you cool the superconductor down. The video in the original post shows you can set the orientation and distance by applying greater than some threshold force, and then it is preserved. Orientation preservation is remarkable.